Mangaluru: Hindutva activist arrested for misusing Hindu girl’s pic, issuing threats

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.

Thiruvananthapuram, Mar 28: A man from Kerala was among the terrorists affiliated to Islamic State (IS) who allegedly attacked a Gurdwara in Kabul earlier this week in which 27 people were killed.

The IS has claimed that one of the suicide bombers was Abu Khalid al-Hindi.

According to sources, investigation agencies on Friday have identified him as 29-year-old Mohammed Sajid Kuthirummal of Padne in Kasargod. He was among the 14 persons, who left from Kerala to join IS in Nangarhar province of Afghanistan.

"IS had released the name Abu Khalid al-Hindi through its media agency soon after the attack. The photograph of him holding a rifle was also published by IS in their propaganda magazine Al Naba. From that, we have identified the person as Mohammed Sajid Kuthirummal. We are investigating the matter and in touch with the investigating agencies in Afghanistan for tracking his trail," sources told ANI.

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) probe had earlier revealed that Mohammed Sajid was recruited by Abdul Rashid Abdulla of Chandera, who was killed in Afghanistan last year.

Sajid worked as a shop keeper in a gulf country and returned to Kerala. Based on a complaint by Sajid's father Mahamood, the FIR was registered at Chendara Police Station, Kasaragod in 2016 regarding Sajid joining IS and leaving for Afghanistan.

He was among the 14 member team that left from Kerala to join IS in Khorasan Province' in Nangarhar.

ANI had earlier reported that two of these members Ayesha alias Sonia Sebastian and Fathima alias Nimisha who were in IS had expressed their interest in returning to Kerala. Out of 14, seven including Sajid is dead.

Feb 26: The Tamil Nadu government on Tuesday claimed that it prevented Karnataka from discussing the contentious Mekedatu reservoir issue at the Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) meeting held in New Delhi.

Besides the representatives of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka at the fifth meeting of CWMA, presided over by Central Water Commission Chairman R K Jain, officials of Kerala and Puducherry also participated.

CWMA member and TN PWD Secretary K Manivasan told reporters after the meeting that the state government prevented Karnataka from discussing the dam issue by pointing out the pending petitions in the Supreme Court against the project filed by the E Palaniswami government.

"We have told participants of the meeting that Mekedatu reservoir will be against the interests of Tamil Nadu and its farmers. Our consistent stand is that it should not be built at any cost. Finally the issue was not discussed in the meeting," Manivasan said.

The Mekedatu reservoir is proposed to be constructed by Karnataka across Cauvery river near Mekedatu, about 110 km from Bengaluru, in Kanakapura taluk.

It was first proposed along with Shivanasamudra hydro power project at Shimsa in 2003 with an intention to use the water for a hydro power station and supply drinking water to Bengaluru city. It was designed to store 67 tmc feet of water.

While Tamil Nadu is claiming that the construction of a balancing reservoir will disturb Cauvery water flow to the state affecting irrigation, Karnataka says the project is basically designed to take care of the drinking water needs of Bengaluru after releasing water to Tamil Nadu as per the quantum specified by the Cauvery water disputes tribunal.